tv Washington Journal CSPAN February 8, 2015 9:15am-10:01am EST
better than peru. we over stayed our visas like a lot of folks do. like i said, people really understand that we are humans we feel that we have smokes like they do and constantly hating on me when they don't know me, it's something that is hard to grasp. and i think that folks need to understand it's far more than a 9-dict number. we are human and we are waiting. we want reform to pass. we are going to continue to push for immigration reform. evenldz, we can be here legally and con and contribute more to the economy he than we do already. host: maria space faeli joining us and patrick ferrell, thank you for your perspective
as well. developments this weekend, the situation in ukraine with world leaders in mupic and angela merkel, we will focus on what's next in ukraine and the dproemacy now underway. we will be here to take your calls and comments. you are watching and listening to c-span's "washington journal" for this sunday morning, february 8th. back in a moment. >> tonight on "q&a," david brooks columnist for the "new york times" on writing an article for the times and the awards he gives out at the end of the year the sidney awards. >> the sidney awards are given for the best magazine essays of the year. they can be in journals or in something like the new yorker, the atlantic or obscure literary magazines. the idea is they come out around christmas week between christmas and new year's. the idea is that's a good week
to step back and not read little stuff, tweets, not even review newspaper articles but read something deeper and longer and it's to celebrate those longer pieces. i do believe magazines change history. the "new republic" until its recent disstruction was the most influential american magazine of the 20th century really did change history. it created progressivism, a voice for modern liberalism. conservative barely existed before buckley national review. it gave it a voice. >> on 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q and a". >> special counsel on tom wheeler's proposal for net neutrality including regulating the internet like a utility. >> the chairman said we are not going to regulate. the new fcc chairman may try to throw this out and do something that's more free-market oriented
or let's regulatory. i don't really by i don't buy the next-chairman argument. the rules are only as good as the guy or the gal on the 8th floor enforcing them. so we've got to do our best to set up anginfrastructure that will protect consumers, that will preserve an open internet which has been the greatest driver of economic development, free speech and innovation this world has ever known. >> monday night at 8 eastern on the communicators on c-span 2. the c-span cities tour takes book t.v. and american history t.v. on the road travel to go u.s. cities to learn about their history and literary life. this weekend, we partnered with time warner cable for a visit to compass christi texas. >> in the 19th century, the federal government was very limited. they don't have many deployable resources. and so the army does a whole variety of things.
they are discoverers, explorers. army contracts are an important part of the western economy. the army plays a role in conservation. in the recent ken burns series on the development of merge national parks, he points out that the parks were established in the 19th century, but there was no one to protect them or preserve them or keep trespassers away or keep hunters off of them. and so the army really because of the efforts of phil sher-dan the command can general at the time, the army steps in and literally saves the national parks until another organization can be created. for better or worse the army and the west did much more than just fight indians. the american people have historically had an an tiptipathy.
we fear a standing army as antithetical to liberty. it's hard for modern observers to realize because now the military is one of the most trusted institutions in the united states. but that wasn't the case in the 19th century. watch at 2:00 p.m. on c-span 3. "washington journal" continues. host: william pomeranz is the director of the keenan institute. thank you for being with us. we appreciate it guest: my pleasure. host: pressure building for ukraine to create a seats fire. a lot of developments over the weekend. we are seeing from a number of publications including "the guardian" it indicates german chancellor merkel is downbeat? >> she has just been to moscow where she met directly with president putin. they are trying to identify some sort of seats fire that would
satisfy russian and ukrainian demands and it's a very difficult situation because the facts keep changing on the ground. so whether chancelor merkel was able to persuade president putin that now is the time to stop the fight, we don't know. host: this is coming when the u.s. leaders are urging the u.s. military to provide lethal assistance to those ukrainian forces. guest: there is growing demand in the u.s. congress to increase the military assistance to ukraine. this would most likely escalate the crisis and it's been greeted in europe at least with demands that we not send lethal weapons because the europeans fear that this will escalate the crisis host: tomorrow the german chancellor will meet with the president. what do you think the two will fiber optics on? guest: trying to finds some means to negotiate a cease-fire in ukraine and then create some sort of space whereby ukraine
can begin to emerge from its own economic and political. hoeflt. host: doesn't the u.s. have an obligation to help these ukrainian fighters who wants to keep the country intact? guest: the u.s. made certain promises in 1994 in terms of the bud budapest memorandum. ukraine is not a member of nato. and there are no immediate military requirements that the u.s. support ukraine in this current conflict but there is obviously growing political pressure in the united states that we owe something to ukraine to to its territoryial integrity and that we should support ukraine in this crisis. there are no kind of specific treaty requirements to come to the aid of ukraine but there are obviously growing political pressures to support the ukrainians in their struggles with russia.
host: in the just a moment, we will hear from defense secretary ashton carter who was asked about ukraine this past week, but how has the administration's views on this evolved over the last couple of years sne guest: i think additional the u.s. was with europe and it specifically said that the administration said that it would not be providing lethal assistance to ukraine. >> consensus is changing i think. there are clearly debates going on within the u.s. government whether to provide the lethal assistance or not and i think a lot will depend on whether merkel was able to negotiate some sort of cease-fire because the pressure is growing, i think, politically in light of what -- of developments on the ground in light of russia's continued support in eastern -- of the ukrainian separatists that something needs to be done on the u.s. side. pressure is growing. host: here is what ashton cart her to say wednesday during his confirmation hearings before the senate armed services committee.
vip (video clip". >> i think it is true in strategy and working these international programs, you have to ask yourself, not the next step but what's the step after that? what happens after? and to your question, two observations, senator, one is that i think that as much as i incline in the direction that i indicated this morning, the economic and political pressure on russia has to remain the main center of gravity of our effort at pushing back and the europeans are critical to that. so european solidarity and nato solidarity are critical in this regard as they are to all of european security and to dealing with the problem of putin. the other thought that the comes to mind is that this is as i
consider what kinds of assistance we may give to the ukrainian military one that does need to think two and even three steps ahead of this matter host: the questions of ashton carter, the nominee to be the next secretary. let me show you where the fight something taking place. what does this tell you? guest: the fighting is still taking place in small towns in eastern ukraine, within the donetsk and the luhansk obelisk. the separatists do not have control of the entire area but that's where the battles are. they are taking place in small towns. they are taking place dealing with kind of local assets railroad junctions and so forth. so, the battles are ongoing. they are inflicting severe casualties significant casualties on the ukrainian
defenders and it's unclear how long the ukrainian army can hold out in eastern ukraine. host: this map courtesy of "the washington post." let's go to max joining us on the flow from england. good afternoon to you. thank you for watching us on the bbc parliament channel. caller: thank you for calling my call. i watch every day. it's great to see you. host: fine. what are your thoughts on all of this and your perspective caller: my perspective, i think from a lot of european perspectives when we look at the ukrainian crisis that is going on, we see the u.s. having to play mr. nice guy because europe -- because obviously russia has a huge military force and the last thing that we want to see is a return back to the cold war days. you know at this time, but a
lot of means feel powerized since the end of the cold war, we kind of hoped that those the u.s. -- we hoped you guys would lead and russia would follow that both of you would kind of get -- reduce the amount of nuclear weapons you guys have to not planet destroying rebels, you could kill a population of the planet like two times over. so that we could then look at the managing things more sensebly. militarily, we in europe feel paralyzed because we have you guys on the one hand and the russians on the other. and if it kicks off in ukraine, we have hungary, romania, slovakia, the czechoslavakia republic and parts of germany and poland involving the ukraine
and it all kicks off there. we are going to have to certainly send in massive amounts of troops in places like france, spain, portugal great brittain islands, nordic countries, you know, something has to be done. >> okay. let's get a response. thank you for phoning in. we appreciate it. guest: the means are in the middle but, you know if indeed this conflict were to spread to the czech republic to the baltic states or all of the eastern european countries that the caller mentioned, the nato guarantees a security would kick n russia is aware of that. the unique aspect of ukraine and the problem for ukraine is that it is not a part of nato and, therefore, it has had to fight so far this battle pretty much on its own. the europeans for a variety of reasons don't want to escalate this crisis because, yes it could begin to escalate up to the borders as well.
they don't want to do that. >> next caller is call from oxford, massachusetts. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me host: we sure can. thank you. caller: thank you for c-span. i want to say, whennists growing up my parents had a lot of friends and family wloe suffered during and after world war ii. i am not a big fan of the russians but i don't think the united states should pressure putin. he could be a potential ally getting poland and all of the baltic countries and i am sure mr. pomeranz knows as i do the united states does not care about ukraine or policy land or any of those countries. i linkthink we should not. guest: i think the sglinings cares about poland and eastern europe and allies. europe is one of the important
trade partners. we have been committedto since the end of world war ii to peace and the recognition of the existing borders in europe. we have a big steak in europe and, therefore, i think the united states is rightfully engaged in this issue and has to take into account what is going on ukraine. host: this may be an obvious question about why angela merkel and francois hollande playing such a keely role? guest: they have the best relationship with putin. he specially angela merkel has been the majority conduit and i think the reasons she chose to become engaged is because she understands the intermediatiary role she can play and is trying to do that. host: she said she is so far disappointed by his at tut. guest: i think she is and not
surprisingly so. nevertheless chancellor merkel who came from east german who speaks russian is someone who at least understands the mentality that is in play here she may not be optimistic but she is willing to at least try to find some sort of acceptable arrangement that would end the fighting in eastern ukraine. host: let's go to george in flower flower mound, texas. good morning. republican line. caller: yes. i have a comment. it might be offensive for some people. my comment, i am romanian. and we -- i believe in many people believe in romania that this intervention in ukraine is not actually done by russia. it is being done by the neocons in the state of ottoman. it's a plan with a very -- it's
a terrible consequences for eastern europe. russia is not any more a danger for eastern europe. people know about soviets but soviet union is not russia today. everything i hear in america -- and i lived in america for 25 years. for the last 10 years, i hear putin did that. putin is doing this, doing that. i think mr. pomeranz probably has roots in eastern europe. i am an engineer but i know something about history of those countries. i think he is biased about the will of the big corporations in america. see, they destroyed industries in eastern europe. romania was put down. host: george, thank you for your call. your response? guest: i think this crisis is
not the result of neocons in the state department. this crisis emerged from ukraine. it was an exer size by ukraineians to pursue a different path. it escalated to a crisis and a changing government and the state department was not involved in that. it is a ukrainian decision to move closer to the west. this has not been masterminded from behind the scenes. host: next to john in providence road rhode island good morning. caller: hi. the gentleman from texas concerning the neocons. et cetera an intel jenlts fellow but the neocons, iraq was their thing but ukraine, the issue there, putin wants to take it in its entirety. his idol was stalin.
these think tanks don't say these things. putin stated before the fall of the soviet union notice '90s, it was like a basically a disgrace. he views the west as he views obama as a joke. these think tanks, six to 18 months, ukraine is going to be in russia's pocket just the way the wiermarc can it in 1941. guest: if putin had wanted all of ukraine action i think he would have ample opportunity to pursue that policy. he has not done so. we are dealing with eastern ukraine and two prove iveningsz within eastern ukraine. if putin were to engage in a ground war in ukraine, it would dramatically increase his losses and incretion the isolation of russia. so, so far he has not pursued a
policy. but as shown talking in the 18th and 19th centuries. so far, he has not pursued a policy whereby he takes all of ukraine. obviously, if that is a i think it will change the response of the united states host: a follow-up, the caller does the russia of today long for the reestablishment of the soviet union? guest: i think putin has wanted to, to try to -- how can i put this? to recreate some of the economic links within the former soviet union. he has used the soviet space to play a major role globally. in order to do so he has pursued the policy of creating a eurasia. in the sparked this because ukraine dfrnts want to be a part of the customs union. there are various sorts of
imperial discussions within russia. >> has been unleashed, but the idea that somehow russia is in a position today to recreate the soviet union, he wants to inex tent tend his influence but recreate the soviet union as a country, that has so far not been on putin -- that has not been an objectsive of putin. host: roger green has this follow us at c-spanwj. they had the ability to join the eu host: in order to join nato you would have to get the agreement of the means and clearly the people have never believed that ukraine was in a position. it didn't want to ant agonize russia by louing ukraine to
join. i don't think ukraine has missed an opportunity to join nato. the opportunity has gone off of the table because of the going crisis. >> from riverside california marlene is next. good morning. call caller can you hear me host: sure can t go ahead. caller: ever since this began, what's been crossing my mind is the comparison between what's going on now with when the germans were encroaching at the beginning it of the second world war and the europeans approach to appeasement. it is concerns me amount.
they had a russian puppet in there working with russia. host: thanks. we have had a number of an al jeez to world war ii. is it a fair comparison? guest: it is a comparison. i don't think at the present time russia, despite the change in the military strength is truly in a position to do what german did in world war ii. but it is a great concern about their empir imperial positions. it's an effort by nato to respond ukraine is in russia's backyard. our ability to engage directly in that part of the world is extremely limited. there is concern about russia's desires to spread influence in the post soviet space. russia, at least at the present
point, is not in an economic position really to do so. host: greg white, mosquecow chief joining united states live from mosque out. thank you for being with us. >> hi. glad to be here. host: your perspective on these negotiations between the french and german leader. so far no, deal well vladimir putin. what is putin looking for? >> i think it's not entirely clear what putin is looking for. he has not stated it clearly, himself and the fact the russians continue to deny all of what the west seems to believe is the indicates about the use of force and their support for the rebels there makes it very difficult to figure out exactly what the outlines of a deal would be. it looks like the kremlin is ready to accept something that would give the separatists control of a bit more territory
and more independence from kiev. >> will be difficult but given the way the fighting is going, ukraineians don't have a lot of a lot tentives, it sounds from the talks over the weekend as though the negotiations are underway. it's not been going easily but they are hoping for another round of takes in the next couple of days and perhaps a summit meeting in minsk ol wednesday. >> it is available online at ws. j..com. putin did put an alternative on the table. what specifically was he asking angela merkel? >> that isn't to the public yet. we don't know exactly. it looks like that offer included substantially more territory for the rebels and greatly increases the autonomy for them western officials
described it as frozen conflict along the lines of what we have seen in the former soviet space where russia backs a break away government places, a breakarm region from georgia or trans mistia part of maldova. russia backs separatethrifts not backed by anyone else host: a tweet from the president of russia indicating a phone conversation between angela merkel and president hollande of france and poroshenko of ukraine. so this is the negotiations are still continuing as we speak right now. correct? >> that's right. a phone conversation with the leaders to try to get the parties on the ground if they can get to an outline they would meet in minsk on wednesday. we don't know yet whether that will happen. host: if there is not an
agreement, if there is not a cease-fire, then what? >> well, that's it looks like fighting would continue on the ground. the big question for the u.s. is the debate of whether to give lethal weapons to the ukrainian military. that's something so far russian has been unwilling to do there is clear division. it will looks like the president has been skeptical. we heard from the germans and french vor civ rusly opposing that idea worrying giving the ukraineians more weapons would lead to an exlative of the conflict because ultimately,ciph rusly opposing that idea, worrying giving the ukraineians more weapons would lead to an exlative of the conflict because ultimately,. russia has shown willingnets to escalate more than the west so far has host: i want to ask a question we talked about this last past week when you joined united
states on c-span radio's "washington today," and that is the reset button that began during the obama administration what happened? >> that's a source lots of debate but clearly reset would argue it succeeded but it wasn't continued. he has a different view of russia's interests and ability to cooperate with the u.s. and so, the efforts is there really seem to have collapsed. the relationship seems frosty. host: this is the headline at this hour as mosque could you talks fail to clench a ukraine peace deal the story rewritten by greg white, joining us live from russia. thank you very much for being with us.
>> glad to be here. coast of coast of continue with calls and comments on this. ryan next ryan good morning. >> good morning. host: good morning, ryan. caller: how are you doing? job we should be sending weapons over to ukraine. it seems like it would just an tagnize the situation. the gentleman said it would escalate everything. we have to think back to the versailles streety, what happened in that germany at that time and the embargo on russia right now to get them to pull out. just put more pressure on the situation for germany to rise up. they were so insulted, treated so badly and they rolled over europe so easily. >> there are various historic examples that are being cited. world war ii and appeasement and
world world war i in versailles. we are in a very difficult situation here because in eastern ukraine, we really don't have any good choices right now. and what's interesting, what the core respondent from the "wall street journal" mentioned is that there is just this difficult issue as to what to do with eastern ukraine and how to give -- and what to do about autonomy of that region: how much autonomy do they get? do they get veto power over certain policies within ukraine? how does the central government maintain control over these provinces? these are very difficult issues. it goes to a history of a country that has -- includes a vurt of different ethnic groups but remained a unified country in the 23 years since the collapse of the soviet union. there are difficult issues at play here it seems it's going to have to be decided in a short period of time when the russians hold the upper hand at least on the ground in eastern
host: our guest william pommerances is a teacher of this topic, russia issues at georgetown university here in washington, d.c. ivory from georgia, independent line. good morning caller: good morning, mr. mr. pomeranz i have been trying to educate myself about what's happening in ukraine. so i have been looking on the internet. i have been looking on google earth to try and understand the geography of the area i don't understand why the ukrainian government didn't basically sever its ties with russia by destroying several key railroad bridges and even blowing up a few of the bridge or the roads that cross in to which would have eliminated all of russia ability to supply weapons and possibly even soldiers to the rebels. guest: the reality is at the
beginning of this crisis in the aftermath of crimea the ukrainian government didn't control the borders of ukraine and clearly, the russians were able to take advantage of that and introduce a variety of weapons into eastern ukraine and send troops into eastern ukraine. so, the ukrainian government was not strong enough. the military was not strong enough to maintain the border and it quickly lost control of it. host: quick follow-up from deedee who said how would the u.s. be safer if that part of ukraine was in nato and how much would it cost us? guest: billions of dollars. the only thing that would make united states safer is that ukraine, then would be a part of the western alliance and would have the security guarantees that nato provides. glen again, that is a long time off from ukraine host: michael next from empiry'all beach california. caller: good morning, steve. good morning, mr. pommerans.
with all of our satellite technology and drones and all of that stuff when vladimir puttip says it's not sending supplies logistics, all of that stuff in to ukraine, can't we just show him photos from our satellites that, yes you are doing it? what do you think his reaction would be? thank you. guest: it is very interesting that the u.s. government hasn't produced those types of pictures. there have been various attempts to identify different tanks and weapons that clearly have russian origins. the u.s. has not done that sort of i hope tellgention briefing where it clearly identifies russian troops and equipment on the ground. president poroshenko yesterday by the way arrived at his talk in munich with several pats ports of russians that the ukrainian army had picked up. he cited that as an example of russian participation in eastern ukraine but there hasn't been a definitive description of
russian's influence in ukraine and it's unclear as to why the u.s. government has chosen not to do so host: next caller from port washington, new york. dustin. good morning independents line. caller: good morning, guys. how is it going? i just wanted to ask within a question to get some clarity as a mel ini can'tn. there is talk about nato and obviously, global sanctions were created for world peace but we can't jump on every single rebeb yol that happens. host: guest: gifts it's different for the u.s. to respond to every rebellion. after 10 years in iraq and afghanistan, we have arrived at this crisis without the resources and willingness to provide the economic assistance we were willing to provide iraq 10 years ago. so we have arrived at this crisis with, i think, significant fatigue and an unwillingness to provide the economic resources that coo
transform ukraine. in many ways the debate could be not about a billion dollars in military assistance but why are we giving tens of billions of dollars to ukraine to support its economic and political transformation? host: could we provide more sanctions against russia? we have sanctions against individuals and specific sectors of the russian economy, namely banking and energy sector. wedged raise the level of sanctions but it takes awhile for sanctions to work as we have learned, and the reality is that sanctions have not changed despite the fact that sanctions have hurt the russian economy, they have not changed puttip's strategy in eastern ukraine. host: trevor is next, new york city. good morning.
caller: one way i think would make an impression on the russians is to deny the russian tourists why don't we deny them passports? guest: the europeans have imposed sanctions against certain individuals that have denied them access to europe. i don't think we are at this tape, we are going to penalize the entire country many won't be able to afford it. the reality is, you know when russians travel abroad, when they experience something different, it only works to our advantage. we do not want to isolate russia. we want russians to understand how the west works and stoto experience the west. therefore, i don't think a travel ban at this time does really appropriate. host: dennits from watertown, south dakota. good morning.
caller: yes. i think one point would be to bring up would be the supply of the natural gas and the pipeline goes through ukraine they have that leverage and since western europe is not energy self-support they would need that natural gas for their winters. >> the gas question is a crucial question for the europeans, for eastern europe and western europe for that matter. they are still dependent on russian gas and this is winter it has forced them to consider share dependence and find alternative forces. europe is taking an active policy to begin to diverse sigh
so it's not so heavily dependent. >> what population. it's -- i don't know the number of that off. top of my head. the question really is what percentage of the population speaks russian and even then that is not necessarily the best indicator as to their sense of ethnicity and national identity. large poningsz did not make the majority of those regions. i think that's with a why putin felt comfortable annexing crime e a and a more confusing path in eastern ukraine. host: michael in burleson
texas. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. host: sure. caller: i have actually spoken from someone from donetsk t also crimea. one from crimea considers themselves russian right now. and the person in donetsk, he is suffering a lot from this war in this region. one of the only helps is the humanitarian aid they get from russia. and i hate seeing that my own nation, the united states, is sending armaments to ukrainian government. what i think -- i think america should just stay out of this conflict. i don't think there is any way that ukraine could actually regain the territories. still, there will be too much
tension. host: thank you, michael. guest: we are facing a major humanitarian crisis in eastern ukraine. they have gotten some supplies from russia. if you read about how people are living in eastern ukraine, they are really facing a tragedy. and therefore, that raises the question, and i think it influences the european perspective: do we just continue this military conflict or do we find some way to have a cease-fire to address the humanitarian issues in the east and the comic and political issues in the west? host: what do you think long-term is president putin's goal? host: guest: i think he wants to maintain a significant degree of influence over ukraine. i don't think he necessarily wants to annex the luhansk and donetsk but that is a possibility. i think his goal is to make sure that russia has influence in ukraine, that it has veto over any attempts to join the e. u
and nato and quite frankly, influence development in ukraine so it doesn't become a successful western state and that could serve as a powerful example inside russia. he doesn't want that to happen as well. host: host: from stanford connecticut, johnny is next. good morning. caller: i had a question given the history of russia losing 35 to 50 million people in world war ii the financial debacle. hopefully our on foreign policy will follow the same from the tank tanks that solve our politicians' directness with iraq and afghanistan >> you have to worry about that. i was wondering. i read that i know you address 60% of ukraine, east ukraine is russian. whether that's true, i don't know. two, what kind of economic infrastructure does russia have
while they are drive to go eastern ukraine and, three, looking at it from their perspective, you know, if russia or china came in to canada or mexico, which is akin to what the is threatening to do in ukraine, we have driven them toward energy policies. i just think the u.s. is pushing on a string. the eu is broke. japan is broke. you know, it's like what are we doing in this country? host: johnny welt leave it there. about half a minute left t guest: i think what the caller touched upon is part of the -- is the relationship between russia and ukraine and trying to deal with these as long standing
economic relationships between these two countries. just because the soviet union collapsed does not mean russia and ukraine did not have substantial trade recess. indeed this crisis began as a trade dispute that ukraine voiced a desire to join the eu and russia opposed that. so, the fundamental nature of how russia and ukraine interact with each other, how they develop trade relations with each other, is still an important question and one that will have to be decided going forward as well. host: wednesday will be a key day. what can you expect? guest: we will find out whether there is some sort of agreement, what that agreement looks like how it can be implemented and whether that agreement is satisfactory enough to postpone the conversation about providing lethal assistance to ukraine. host: william pomeranz parts of the keenan institute, thank you very much for being with us. we appreciate it. guest: my pleasure. host: we will continue the conversation as we do arrange
morning and jonathan allen washington bureau chief will be with united states to talk about the issue we fiber opticsed on this morning: congress taking up the use of military force against isis and more on the affordable care act t harlan bowman 7 -- karlyn bowman public opinion on posing issues around the country. a monday roundtable focusing on the president's plan for about a $500,000,000,000 in highways bridges and mass transit. tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. newsmakers is up next. thank you for joining us on this sunday, hope you enjoy the rest of your weekend. have a great week ahead. ...